benefit marketing and social marketing - a discussion new

8/12/2019 Benefit Marketing and Social Marketing - A Discussion New

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/benefit-marketing-and-social-marketing-a-discussion-new 1/29

Murali Krishnamurthy

SOCIAL MARKETING AND BENEFIT

MARKETING – THE SIGNIFICANT SHIFT IN

FOCUS WORLDWIDE



Outline

2

Introduction

The marketing Concepts of Benefit Marketing The 5 Significant Changes in approach

Method: Application versus Organisational Function and

Process

Process: Analysis, Planning, Execution and Evaluation versusCreating

Communicating and Delivering

Payload: Influence on voluntary behaviour versus Value

Outcome: Personal / Societal Welfare versus Organisational

/Stakeholder Benefit

Adapting Direct Benefit

Some Examples



Introduction

3

Social change marketing is at the crossroads. When the

international marketing body, the American Marketing Association

decided to revise the definition of marketing to explicitly include

direct benefit to the organisation, one of the central tenets of

social marketing came into conflict with the very nature of

“marketing”, the discipline from which it derives and of which it isa part.

The introduction of direct benefit to the organisation as a core

tenet of the marketing concept is the antithesis of the social

marketing principle of indirect benefit. The previously immutable

boundary between societal marketing (social causes forcommercial gain) and social marketing (social causes for societal

benefit) has been erased, at least, if social marketing wishes to

remain within the marketing field.



Introduction

4

Kotler, Roberto and Lee (2002) contributed to the

contemporary social marketing debate by offering the

following definition:

”The use of marketing principles and techniques to influence

a target audience to voluntarily accept, reject, modify, or

abandon their behaviour for the benefit of individuals,

groups or society as a whole.”

Within the context of the Kotler and Andreasen’s definitions,

commercial marketing was defined as:

‘The process of planning and executing the conception,

pricing, promotion, and distribution of ideas, goods, and

services to create exchanges that satisfy individual and

organizational objectives’ .



The Marketing Component of Benefit Marketing

5

As part of the overall marketing discipline, benefit marketing shares

common traits with broader commercial marketing applications.These are:

The adoption of the customer centric marketing philosophy which

puts the needs of the client at the centre of organisational activities.

In social marketing, this represents the focus on the voluntary

change by the individual to create broad changes in society. Similarly,

the individualistic focus of social/benefit marketing is enhanced

through the understanding of the individual as a consumer of ideas,

behaviours, services and products. By understanding and addressing

the consumption process through a consumer centric focus, changecan be leveled at the appropriate consumption process. This can

occur through changing an attitude or introducing a substitute

behaviour or product to enable the consumer to act on the social

change idea.




6

Market research based decision making and tracking of

campaigns. Consumer centric campaigns are dependent on anunderstanding of the consumer, their attitudes, opinions,

knowledge and behaviours. For social marketing to be most

effective, it needs to include information from the consumer,

rather than assumptions from experts as to how the consumer“thinks”.

Segmentation of target audiences which is based around the

implementation of social change at the individual level.

Segmentation is used to cluster the social change candidatesby a key factor (e.g. risk taking behaviour) or propensity to

respond to market messages in a similar way (high need for

sensation seeking).




7

The creation of mutually beneficial exchanges, a concept which

is at the core of the 1984 commercial marketing definition.Exchange in the social marketing sense derives from the

broadest level of Bagozzi’s (1975) theory of exchange. Whereas

commercial marketing is based predominantly on the

assumption of direct or restricted exchange (products formoney), social/benefit marketing derives benefits from the

broadest exchange where the exchange occurs between the

individual and the society. For example, where the social

message of anti-speeding is adopted by the individual, society

benefits from the safer driving for example, in reduced health

costs, and the driver benefits by avoiding penalties (speeding

fines), reducing their accident risk.




9

In essence, social/benefit marketing is the adaptation, rather than direct

transference, of marketing tools and techniques for social change campaigns. Overall, the fundamental difference between social marketing and commercial

marketing has been a matter of focus. Commercial marketing has a bottom line

of direct benefit measured in dollar values. Benefit marketing has a bottom line

measured according to whether or not the target adopter changes their

behaviour. The benefit marketing campaign may succeed where change occurs,

does not draw a direct benefit to the social marketer or the social change

organisation that is demonstrably akin to profit in the commercial sense. It is

possible to even argue that the ultimate success of a behaviour change

campaign is the termination of the campaign as it has “solved” the social

problem.

This represents a major shift in the perception of marketing, creating majordifferences between the 1985 and 2004 definitions. The five most significant

changes are presented to demonstrate the refocus of marketing and to

showcase the demonstrable difference in the operation of commercial

marketing as compared to social marketing.



Change I: Function and Process

10

Commercial marketing is now self-defined as an organisational function and

process where previously, it was perceived predominantly as an organisational

process.

Redefining marketing as an organisational function alters the use of marketing

as a series of techniques and practices into a more formalised element of the

organisation. It is possible that this functional element of the marketing

definition may exclude organisations which, whilst using the processes, fail to

explicitly include an organisational function from being "marketingorganisations".

Although an apparently cosmetic change, the implication for social/benefit

marketing is the need to incorporate the recognition of organisational function

of marketing. This may prove problematic for organisations where “marketing”

is still perceived in a negative light, even if the organisation engages in social

marketing practice. Marketing and its associated activities is often referred to in

the social sector by alternative terminology, for example, community

consultation and client feedback instead of market research. Social marketers

will need to determine if the organisational function aspect of the new

definition forces a need to have a specifically recognisable marketing function.



Change II: Create, Communicate and Deliver Value, not

marketing mixes

11

The second major change is that the new definition no longer

explicitly recognises the marketing mix as part of the marketing.Further, whereas the 1984 marketing definition introduced the

then controversial “product, idea and service” trichotomy, the

2004 definition merges these individual components into the

broad “value” concept.

However, to add to the complexity of the social marketer’s

adoption and adaptation approach, value itself has not been

explicitly defined within the new marketing definition. The AMA

defines value as “the power of any good to command other

goods in peaceful and voluntary exchange”. The critical elementof the “value” then is the explicit recognition of the exchange of

goods. Goods, as the AMA define them, return to the narrow

conceptualisation of goods as “a product that has tangible form,

in contrast to services that are intangible”.



Change III: Managing the relationship

12

The third shift in focus has been the incorporation of the relationship

marketing concept as a core platform. Relationship marketing’s

ascendency since 1990 has meant that it has become an integral part ofthe marketing process, culminating with it replacing the previous notion

of satisfying individual and organisational objectives. Grönroos (1994)

defined relationship marketing as:

“Marketing is to establish, maintain, and enhance relationships with

customers and other partners, at a profit, so that the objectives of the

parties involved are met. This is achieved by a mutual exchange and

fulfillment of promises” .

Components of relationship marketing have incorporated into the

"managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organisationand its stakeholders". Relationship marketing is predicated on the

conditions of longer term interaction between organisation and

consumer, and does fit within the conceptual boundaries of social

marketing, particularly with respect to maintenance phase of behavioural

change.



Change IV: Benefiting the Organisation and the Stakeholder

13

The new definition broadens the role of the marketing

orientation beyond the dynamic between client/customerand the organisation. The expansion of the concept to include

stakeholder benefit as an explicit role of marketing impacts

on the type and nature of the strategies that can be

considered to be marketing strategy. A core imperative to

arise from the marketing definition is the need to define the

organisation's stakeholders. Freeman (1984) defines

stakeholders as "any group or individual who can affect or is

affected by the achievement of the firm’s objectives". This is a

noticeable departure from the narrow view of stakeholdersas shareholders, stockholders or owners of the organisation

(Clement, 2005).



Change IV: Benefiting the Organisation and the Stakeholder

14

Stakeholders can be further split into primary stakeholders, who are

directly involved in the ongoing survival of the organisation (e.g.

employees, customers and suppliers etc.); and secondary

stakeholders, who are influential, but not essential for the survival of

the organisation (e.g. activists, communities and governments). The

definition of "stakeholders" is now a critical element in determining

what marketing can do to create benefit for the organisation and the

stakeholders.

From a social/benefit marketing perspective, incorporating

stakeholders has been a central tenet of indirect benefit exchange,

and as such, represents the inclusion of aspects of social marketing’s

involvement in promoting marketing exchanges that lead to benefitsaccruing to the individual and broader society. Both social marketing

(individual and society) and relationship marketing (individual and

partners) have contributed to the inclusion of the stakeholders.



Change V: The End of Exchange

15

Perhaps the most disruptive change in the redefinition of

marketing has been the removal of exchange as understood by

Bagozzi (1975) and its replacement with direct benefit. Even

though exchange is incorporated into the AMA definition of value,

Bagozzi (1975) argued for three forms of exchange transactions –

restricted, generalised and complex.

Restricted exchange involved two parties to the transaction withvalue being transferred from one to the other (A to B, B to A).

Generalised exchange increased the number of parties to the

transaction, but fundamentally continued to allow for the flow of

benefit so long as all parties could show benefit (A to B to C to A).

Finally, Bagozzi introduced the concept of complex exchange

where multiple parties to the value transfer exchanged with each

other in a system (A to B, A to C, B to A, B to C, C to A, C to B).



Change V: The End of Exchange

16

Direct benefit explicitly rejects the notion of generalised exchange (A

to B to C to A) as A does not receive benefit from B. In this context,

social marketing is based on generalised exchange (campaign gives

benefit to adopters, adopters give benefits to society, society supports

campaign) does not meet the precondition of direct benefit. In some

respects, only Bagozzi’s restricted exchange between two parties

seems compatible with the limitation of direct benefit. Even so, direct

benefit is not exchange, and exchange, once specifically the

acknowledged ultimate aim of marketing is no longer included in the

definition.

For social marketers, the change from exchange to direct benefit

presents a major conceptual dilemma. If, by the most relaxedinterpretation of the definition of value, Bagozzi’s exchange concept is

still a component of marketing, then social marketing may be able to

still claim the Bagozzi complex exchange as justification for their

continued involvement as a sub-discipline of marketing.



The Components and the Difference

17




18

Method: Application versus Organisational Function and

Process-

Method examines the definition's approach to how social

or commercial marketing is used by the organisation. Both

definitions of social marketing see the role of marketing asa series of processes, principles and techniques which is

consistent with the 2004 definition. As mentioned

previously, social marketing may need to expand the use

and application aspect of the definition to include a

component of an organisational function.




19

Process: Analysis, Planning, Execution and Evaluation versus Creating

Communicating and Delivering Process is the examination of how the definition sees marketing operating in

practice. Curiously, Kotler, Roberto and Lee (2002) does not explicitly recognise

the process element, which is in direct contrast to the Andreasen’s (1995) social

marketing and the AMA’s (2004) commercial marketing definitions. As noted

previously, the first area of conflict between social marketing and the 2004

commercial marketing definition arises from the meaning of "value". InAndreasen's (1995) social marketing definition, the process of social marketing

uses marketing for analysis, planning, execution and evaluation of programs,

whereas the commercial marketing is for the creation, communication and

delivery of value. Social marketing's process role is a more complicated series of

tasks explicitly involving preemptive market research in the form of analysis,and post-facto research in the evaluation of programs. Although not

incompatible with a broad definition of value based around consumer driven

needs, the process aspect of Andreasen's (1995) definition offers a more robust

model of conducting social change marketing.




20


Payload is the purpose of the marketing activity and represents the

"bottom line" of marketing. In both social marketing definitions, thepurpose is clearly stated as influencing voluntary behaviour, with

Kotler, Roberto and Lee (2002) detailing the types of voluntary

behaviour being sought. In this sense, the bottom line for social

marketing is behavioural change.

Commercial marketing has the twin payload of delivering value to the

consumer, and managing the customer relationship. In order to assess

compatibility, the question is whether influences on voluntary

behaviour constitute a form of value? Again, this is based on the

conceptualisation of value chosen for the analysis. Under the AMA“goods-for-goods value”, then voluntary behaviour change is not a

form of value. However, if value is perceived by the consumer or

defined as "the price people are willing to pay", then voluntary change

may constitute value.




21


The second component of the commercial marketing payload is the

management of customer relationships which has not been a statedfactor in the two social marketing definitions. It is possible to equate

Andreasen's programs with managed customer relationships. For

instance, Andreasen's (1995) programs are seen as ongoing

coordinated activities designed to achieve an organisation's mission.

Similarly, the management of customer relationships for the benefit ofthe organisation can be seen to be a focus of the ongoing activities of

the commercial organisation to achieve its mission. Whilst definitions

of social marketing have not explicitly included relationship marketing,

the focus of relationship marketing is on longer term relationships,

customer loyalty and lifetime value of the customer. This is consistent

with social marketing's long term behavioural change views that seek

permanent attitude and behavioural change (effective loyalty to the

social change cause).




22

Outcome: Personal/Societal Welfare versus Organisational/Stakeholder

Benefit Influence the voluntary behaviour of target audiences in order to improve

their personal welfare and that of their society." (Andreasen, 1995)

For the benefit of individuals, groups or society as a whole.” (Kotler 2002).

For managing customer relationships in ways that benefit the organization

and its stakeholders. (AMA 2004).

Outcome examines what each marketing definition declares to be the

intentional result of the marketing activities. For both social marketing

definitions, the clear message is that the purpose of their activity is to

improve the individual's personal welfare and the welfare of society aswhole. Commercial marketing specifies direct benefit to the organisation

and its stakeholders which is in direct conflict with the indirect benefits

approach of social marketing.




23

Direct benefit to an organisation undertaking a social change activity has

historically been recognised as societal marketing, which is defined as occurring

when an organisation balances not only the needs of the organisation and itsclients, but explicitly acts to be socially responsible in pursuit of its commercial

goals, e.g. voluntary adoption of production methods which minimize harm to

the environment and decreases product costs.

Requiring direct benefit as a component of marketing forces an additional

problem for social marketing as Andreasen (1995) and Kotler, Roberto and Lee

(2002) both emphasize the primary aim of social marketing is individual and

societal gain. Kotler, Roberto and Lee (2002) draws the comparison between the

1985 definition and social marketing by remarking that both forms of marketing

aim for the greatest return on the investment of resources.

Under the 1985 definition of commercial marketing, “return” is the "exchanges

that satisfy individual and organisational objectives, allowing social marketing todeliver improved welfare (individual objective) through behavioural change

(organisational objective)” . However, individual and societal improvements are

not direct benefits to the organisation, even where the social changes meet the

organisational goals.



Adapting Direct Benefit

24

What then can social marketing use as a measure of direct benefit to

the organisation and its stakeholders? Does success count as a direct

benefit? However, success in social marketing represents the provisionof a solution to a social problem resulting in the market condition

where success equates lower demand, and a lesser need for the social

marketing solution. Consequently, as a social change organisation is

more successful, it reduces the longer term need for its existence, so

that ultimate success for social marketing is to make the market need

obsolete and the organisation defunct.

Given this is in direct opposition to commercial marketing, and the

success - as longevity orientation of commercial marketing, social

marketing success cannot realistically be considered a "benefit" to theorganisation. At the same time, failure to address the market need will

continue the organisation's existence, but equally does not equate to

a benefit (financial or otherwise) to the social change organisation.



Tata Tea – Jaago Re Campaign (Voting)

Tata Tea partnered with Janaagraha to launch ‘Jaago Re One Billion Votes’, acampaign to mobilize citizens of India to register and cast their votes in the

assembly elections. Against a belief that one vote in a billion does not matter. The

impact is visible - above 6.5 lakh Indians have used the Jaago Re platform till date

to register as voters.



Tata Tea – Jaago Re Campaign (Corruption)

The current Jaago Re campaign urges the citizens of

the country to awaken and fight against corruption.

The campaign aims at not only creating awareness

about corruption but also inspiring people ‘To be

the change you seek’.

The message of the campaign is to stop pointingfingers at the others and start doing their bit. It

urges people to take a pledge that they will not pay

bribes.

The campaign seeks to highlight the key message

that there would be no bribes taken if no one was to

offer it.

So, it is “Aaj se Khilana Bandh … Pilana

Shuru”!



Social Marketing Campaign/Ads - Smoking

The Dubai Municipality has launched a campaign called 'Tobacco-free Women', which will last till May 31,the day observed as 'World No-Tobacco Day'.

This year, the theme of the 'World No-Tobacco Day' is how to control smoking in women, who comprise

about 20 percent of the world's total smokers. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has chosen this

theme with a focus on women who are targeted by tobacco companies to promote their products.



Social Marketing Campaign/Ads - Smoking

ITC Limited and other cigarette manufacturing companies in India launch print and media advertisementson the danger of smoking. Some of the advertisements are seen to create an immediate impact on the

viewer/reader.

The ads are created to make such an impact and the expectations are that they would be adapted and

adopted by the consumers.



Social Marketing Campaign/Ads - Drinking

Many liquor companies including United Breweries, Khaitan Radico etc are campaigning actively for the‘Don’t drink and drive’ messages. The companies themselves sponsor ads and promote them during

important sports and other events – both through the print media and the audio visual media.

Some of the ads can be seen below.

benefit marketing and social marketing - a discussion new

Documents